krud
1yr ago
No aspect of the CRA would actually need to be repealed to achieve most of what Hanania wants, which is the elimination of disparate impact doctrine. That is not enshrined in the text but was instead created through bureaucratic EEOC decisions, executive orders, and legal decisions.
This is false. While the Civil Rights Act didn't originally include disparate impact (the Supreme Court developed it in Griggs), it was eventually codified in the Civil Rights Act of 1991. See 42 U.S. Code § 2000e–2.
The Ricci v. DeStefano opinion briefly reviewed this.
Checked the Tennessee Code (Title 36, Chapter 1: Adoption) and it does explicitly say "[a]n adult may be adopted" in Section 107. Section 117 talks about getting the adult adoptee's consent. The previous parent also normally needs to consent -- at least, I didn't see anything saying the parent's consent isn't required if her child is 18.
More options
Context Copy link